Irresponsible Gun Owner of the Day: Helen Staudinger

I’m a strong proponent of the United States Constitution and take the 2nd Amendment at face value. However… a person’s gotta know their limits. When 92-year old cougar Helen Staudinger was denied a smooch by her spry 53-year-old neighbor, she went all Fort McCoy gansta and shot up his house. According to the smokinggun.com, “Investigators allege that Staudinger went next door to speak with Dwight Bettner, but her 53-year-old neighbor asked her to leave. In an interview with a sheriff’s deputy, Staudinger said she told Bettner that she would not leave unless he gave her a kiss. Bettner declined, which triggered an argument between the Fort McCoy residents.

That is when an incensed Staudinger returned to her home, got her gun, and allegedly fired into Bettner’s residence. Bettner, who was hit by flying debris, was not seriously injured by the gunfire.

Staudinger told a cop that she had planned to “shoot his car that he loved so much.” Investigators believe that she instead “fired diagonally through the victim’s carport hitting the house with all four rounds fired.”

Just like driving a car, there comes a time when you have to park the magazine and leave the neighborhood shooting to the professional gangs. Those of us with elderly parents or grandparents take note: we are all responsible for gun safety.

Rural Florida has more than its share of these kinds of incidents. The fact that she’s as old as she is brings up another controversial subject. When are people too old to responsibly handle guns? It’s possible the old Helen is not too old, that she’s just another maniac gun owner. We’ve seen plenty of cases where guys half her age did stupid shit just like that.

I say it’s the responsibility of the family and friends to decide and it may differ from person to person. Meanwhile, anybody who shoots up the house next door, whatever age they are, loses their gun rights.

Of course it’s the family’s job to decide, Mike. Who else would you have do it? Certainly not some mind-numbed, government bureaucrat whose only motivating impulses are checking all of the boxes on the form and risk aversion at any cost.

It’s just like the decision about when someone’s too old to drive. It’s a matter for the elderly individual’s family and friends. No one else is qualified to do it, not should they have that kind of power over an individual’s rights.

Or maybe you’re right, Mikey. She’s probably “just another maniac gun owner.” There are so many of us, after all. Better just to take her out and shoot her.

I think you were agreeing with me, but it was hard to tell by the tone. Why don’t you lighten up and you’ll see that I’m not your enemy, I’m just someone who has a different opinion. I didn’t say anything about shooting people who are unfit to responsibly own guns. I say they need to be disarmed. I also didn’t say there are SO many of you maniacs. What I do say is there is a certain percentage of you guys who are unfit. I think that percentage is a bit too high.

Why do you take that so personally that even when you agree with me it sounds like you’re arguing?

I do agree. As I wrote, her family should prehumously inherit all of her firearms. I wouldn’t want her on the road in a car, let alone owning guns.

As for the rest, let me think a minute. Why would anyone take offense to someone saying, “…she’s just another maniac gun owner?” Oh. I know. Because it implies that there are so many maniac gun owners that she’s just another one in the crowd. When you write that, you tar all gun owners with the same brush. Words mean things, Mikey.

And don’t worry, I don’t think of you as an enemy. In fact, I don’t think of you at all. Except, of course, when you write something inane like that.